I accept life is a compromise but if you don't see what people's problems are......
1. As per earlier - they kill/harm more people
2.........
Popularity of sport utility vehicles driving higher oil demand and climate crisis, say experts
www.theguardian.com
Whether these issues are enough for people to want any kind of legislative change is more subjective.... and your view is as valid as mine or anyone else's.
I get it, I just don't think the problems are valid, or anywhere near as valid as people are making out, not compared to other ways which motoring could be made safer all round, or less emissions.
Depends what you're classing like for like? I doubt there are stats to make it like for like, but I'll try and show something.
As for the Guardian's "stats", do these factor that basic 2WD SUV's with small engines (which are what people seem to have the most problem with, weirdly) are more likely used for school runs and the like, thus generally doing less miles overall, so less emissions per car, than average? Do they factor that some of the larger SUV's with 4WD and big engines are doing loads of miles and bought because they're more capable in certain circumstances, like towing, off road, contractor/ work use etc? Do they factor that that a more modern SUV would likely be better on fuel and have emissions capture mechanisms, compared to older cars like saloons etc?
Basically what I'm getting at is most people driving an old petrol or diesel saloon or hatchback (like most of the "Tyre Extinguishers" I expect), doing 10k miles a year are probably more damaging than someone doing 10k in a modern low power 2WD SUV, especially if the SUV is an EV, which most will be in the next couple of years. I would be surprised if the average old car isn't doing a lot more miles than a school run SUV also. Sure a new saloon or hatchback might have less emissions, but it's smaller, less capacity, that might not matter to the person complaining, but I bet it does to the one they're complaining about. Then with the electric ones (which most will be), more and more energy is coming from renewables, and charged off peak, the electric carbon intensity compared to most other things is far less per kW, purely due to time of charge, and all of that will get better every year. I think getting people into newer cars is a good thing, even better when those new cars filter through to others, and even better if they're accelerating changes into the EV market, which they are.
I very much doubt there are many people driving a large SUV, doing loads of miles and have not bought it purely because it's a larger car with more space, people just want more, with everything. I doubt many are buying an SUV to "look good", as although some look ok, smaller hot hatches or a convertible or something might look better, but just be of less practical use, so they don't buy it.
Emissions are already taxed, big cars already cost more (so more VAT), fuel is taxed (ICE or Electric), there's more VED on more expensive cars, especially those over 40k which hit the surcharge which most SUV's will be I expect.
Even for crashes, a standardised 30mph crash from an SUV v a small old petrol/ diesel then maybe it would have more risk if an impact occurred, marginally. But, what if the SUV is higher spec, more modern, more safety features? Effectively reducing the probability of the impact, but upping the effect marginally, thus overall risk is lower? What if a massive amount of SUV miles are school runs, and hence they're going to kill more kids per mile driven as more of the miles are in 30mph zones, or around schools etc?
Emissions from petrol, diesel or older cars kill more people, or will do long term, it's probably a good thing getting people to move into more modern cars, and if they do that to an SUV then that seems fine to me. Emissions from a 1.5ltr 2WD fairly modern SUV will be less than most older cars, or even 1.5 ltr diesels etc. People buying 3ltr hot hatches kill more people per mile in impacts and emissions, if you put them on the same roads at the same time, I've not even checked this but I guarantee it, are people letting their tyres down?
As for EV's, larger batteries, sure an SUV might need a larger battery in the eyes of most, but one used for school runs and normal commutes certainly wouldn't, the public have been conned into thinking range is everything, and it really isn't (for the vast majority, for the vast majority of miles). Then also factor that an SUV used for school runs, shopping, and limited motoring are likely doing that at less speed (they mention use around cities), and hence less drag, so would actually get more out of the same sized battery, than someone driving at 50mph average in a saloon in the country, the same applies to normal fuel too, drag uses more energy for ICE as well as EV. Drag is effectively exponential v speed too, so has much more impact at higher speed than slower speeds, so if you're doing less speed then the differences are more marginal. i.e a SUV v Saloon at 20mph might be 1% difference, but at 50mph might be 10% difference in consumption. i.e if someone is going to have a gripe about SUV's (or any car's emissions) then the ones to target are those doing more miles at higher speeds with bigger engines, those holding onto inefficient cars, or those not using the additional space (of any car).
